Posted!

Join the Conversation

Comments

Welcome to our new and improved comments, which are for subscribers only.
This is a test to see whether we can improve the experience for you.
You do not need a Facebook profile to participate.

You will need to register before adding a comment.
Typed comments will be lost if you are not logged in.

Please be polite.
It's OK to disagree with someone's ideas, but personal attacks, insults, threats, hate speech, advocating violence and other violations can result in a ban.
If you see comments in violation of our community guidelines, please report them.

Advocates hopeful abortion ruling will set safeguards for La. clinics

Pro-abortion rights protesters rally outside the Supreme Court in Washington Wednesday. The abortion debate returned to the Supreme Court in the midst of a raucous presidential campaign and less than three weeks after Justice Antonin Scalias death. The justices heard the biggest case on the topic in nearly a quarter century and considering whether a Texas law that regulates abortion clinics hampers a woman's constitutional right to obtain an abortion.(Photo: Susan Walsh/AP)

A Supreme Court ruling on a Texas abortion case could have implications for Louisiana's abortion clinics and their supporters.

On June 27, the Supreme Court struck down a Texas abortion access law after deeming two of its restrictions as unconstitutional. Those restrictions, presented in Texas HB 2, required all abortions to take place in surgical centers that also had obtained local hospital admitting privileges.

The 5-3 decision is being hailed as a win for women by pro-choice advocates in Louisiana, who are hopeful the decision will set safeguards for the state's remaining clinics.

"Today's Supreme Court ruling reaffirms a woman's constitutional right and ability to access safe, legal abortion, no matter where she lives or who her legislators are," said Amy Irvin, executive director of the New Orleans Abortion Fund. "We're extremely relieved by the Supreme Court decision. This is a day of celebration."

The issues in the Texas case were presented in the 2015 case of Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt— where those in favor of dismissing the restrictions argued they would shutter more than half of Texas's abortion clinics and cause unnecessary hardship for women.

A similar law in Louisiana related to hospital admitting privileges was blocked in 2014 by a trial judge, who said doctors often have trouble obtaining admitting privileges for reasons unrelated to their competence. But the federal appeals court allowed the law to go into effect in February, despite advocates who said provisions would leave the state with a sole abortion provider in New Orleans.

Advocates of pro-choice legislation said the ruling comes at a needed time, especially following several bills related to abortion restrictions that passed in the recent legislative session. Those bills included approval of HB 1081, sponsored by Mike Johnson and which banned a second-trimester dismemberment abortion technique, as well as approval of HB 386, which increased to 72 hours the wait time prior to an abortion.

"Louisiana has become a Petri dish for anti-choice legislation. This decision puts Louisiana politicians on notice and shows they are out of touch with the nation's values," Irvin said. "The Supreme Court ruling today is monumental, and I'm hoping it will galvanize supporters across Louisiana to become more involved and for women who stood on the sidelines in silence or shame to come out of the shadows."

District 15 House Rep. Frank Hoffman, who sponsored several of the state's most recent abortion legislation, said the laws that exist— and those upcoming in the 2016 legislative session— were created to protect women and ensure that clinics meet safe standards for their operations. Hoffman said he was "shocked" and "disappointed" by the Supreme Court ruling but remained hopeful that the Texas ruling—based on facts specific to Texas clinics— would not impact Louisiana law.

"How this applies to Louisiana law? We're hoping that it doesn't apply at all," Hoffman said. "But that remains to be seen."

Lift Louisiana's Executive Director Michelle Erenberg said the ruling bodes well for the pending cases regarding hospital privileges in Louisiana.

"The ruling is an important first step in dismantling medically unnecessary laws designed to make it harder for women to end a pregnancy," said Michelle Erenberg. "It sets an example. The reason that Texas clinics will begin to reopen is because the Texas case made it to the Supreme Court before Louisiana's did. It's a technicality."

Erenberg said the ruling is a clear message that courts need to take a strict look at what laws intend.

"It's not enough for the legislature to simply say that these laws are good for a woman's health. There needs to be a burden of proof, " Erenberg said. "We hope this is a watershed moment in changing the discussion in Louisiana, to refocus on policy decisions that really do improve the health and economic well-being of women in Louisiana."

Louisiana Right to Life Legislative Director Deanna Wallace said the precedent set in the Texas ruling could mean trouble for Louisiana's women and children.

"It's a troubling decision. We know Louisiana clinics have failed to meet standards, and it's imperative that women are safe when they enter these clinics," Wallace said. "How bad are these clinics if they can't get admitting privileges? We've said from the start this was to weed out the doctors who were not qualified to do this."

The Supreme Court ruling affirmed for both pro-life and pro-choice advocates the importance of the upcoming elections.

"It's an important wake up call for the country that elections have consequences," Wallace said. "Louisiana voters have a choice in this upcoming election, and we have the chance to vote in line with our values."